Literature DB >> 26389630

Different levels of learning interact to shape the congruency sequence effect.

Daniel H Weissman1, Zoë W Hawks1, Tobias Egner2.   

Abstract

The congruency effect in distracter interference tasks is often reduced after incongruent relative to congruent trials. Moreover, this congruency sequence effect (CSE) is influenced by learning related to concrete stimulus and response features as well as by learning related to abstract cognitive control processes. There is an ongoing debate, however, over whether interactions between these learning processes are best explained by an episodic retrieval account, an adaptation by binding account, or a cognitive efficiency account of the CSE. To make this distinction, we orthogonally manipulated the expression of these learning processes in a novel factorial design involving the prime-probe arrow task. In Experiment 1, these processes interacted in an over-additive fashion to influence CSE magnitude. In Experiment 2, we replicated this interaction while showing it was not driven by conditional differences in the size of the congruency effect. In Experiment 3, we ruled out an alternative account of this interaction as reflecting conditional differences in learning related to concrete stimulus and response features. These findings support an episodic retrieval account of the CSE, in which repeating a stimulus feature from the previous trial facilitates the retrieval and use of previous-trial control parameters, thereby boosting control in the current trial. In contrast, they do not fit with (a) an adaptation by binding account, in which CSE magnitude is directly related to the size of the congruency effect, or (b) a cognitive efficiency account, in which costly control processes are recruited only when behavioral adjustments cannot be mediated by low-level associative mechanisms. (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26389630     DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000182

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  7 in total

1.  Let your fingers do the walking: Finger force distinguishes competing accounts of the congruency sequence effect.

Authors:  Daniel H Weissman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-10

Review 2.  Evidence against conflict monitoring and adaptation: An updated review.

Authors:  James R Schmidt
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-06

3.  Partial repetition costs index a mixture of binding and signaling.

Authors:  Daniel H Weissman; Lauren D Grant; Iring Koch; Eliot Hazeltine
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-07-21       Impact factor: 2.157

4.  Sequential Modulations in a Combined Horizontal and Vertical Simon Task: Is There ERP Evidence for Feature Integration Effects?

Authors:  Katharina Hoppe; Kristina Küper; Edmund Wascher
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-06-30

Review 5.  Measuring Adaptive Control in Conflict Tasks.

Authors:  Senne Braem; Julie M Bugg; James R Schmidt; Matthew J C Crump; Daniel H Weissman; Wim Notebaert; Tobias Egner
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2019-07-19       Impact factor: 20.229

6.  Memory Meets Control in Hippocampal and Striatal Binding of Stimuli, Responses, and Attentional Control States.

Authors:  Jiefeng Jiang; Nadia M Brashier; Tobias Egner
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Registered Replication Report of Weissman, D. H., Jiang, J., & Egner, T. (2014). Determinants of congruency sequence effects without learning and memory confounds.

Authors:  Mate Gyurkovics; Marton Kovacs; Matt Jaquiery; Bence Palfi; Filip Dechterenko; Balazs Aczel
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 2.199

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.